IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i20p13258-d943034.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Regulation, Family Involvement and Green Innovation Efficiency—Based on Sew Theory Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Zhiyong Zheng

    (School of Accounting, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou 310018, China)

  • Yongbin Xu

    (School of Accounting, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou 310018, China)

Abstract

The green innovation of family enterprises under environmental regulation is essentially the balance between emotional benefits and emotional costs, which manifests as the reputation incentive and risk aversion, respectively. The reputation incentive refers to inheriting extended social–emotional wealth, and risk aversion means maintaining constrained social–emotional wealth. Based on the theoretical framework of social–emotional wealth, this paper selects 3006 family enterprises in China from 2015 to 2020, establishes a panel model of fixed effects, and discusses the impact of environmental regulation on the green innovation efficiency in family enterprises from the perspective of family involvement. The findings indicate that command-based environmental regulation promotes green innovation efficiency in family enterprises, while market-based environmental regulation inhibits the green innovation efficiency of family enterprises. The involvement of family ownership strengthens the positive effect of command-based environmental regulation on green innovation efficiency, while the involvement of family management rights strengthens the negative effect of market-based environmental regulation on green innovation efficiency. Through mechanism analysis, it is found that command-based environmental regulation promotes green innovation efficiency in family enterprises through reputation incentives, while market-based environmental regulation reduces the green innovation efficiency of family enterprises by avoiding risks. Further analysis shows that high-competition and high-pollution industries are more significantly affected by the relationship between them. Therefore, this paper proposes improvements to green innovation efficiency in family enterprises based on the adjustment of four aspects: improving the risk management level, consolidating family control, increasing the shareholding ratio of nonfamily shareholders, and giving full play to the role of reputation incentives to achieve the sustainable development of family enterprises. Furthermore, we strive to contribute to the realization of the dual carbon goals and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Suggested Citation

  • Zhiyong Zheng & Yongbin Xu, 2022. "Environmental Regulation, Family Involvement and Green Innovation Efficiency—Based on Sew Theory Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-21, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13258-:d:943034
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13258/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13258/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ann Harrison & Benjamin Hyman & Leslie Martin & Shanthi Nataraj, 2015. "When do Firms Go Green? Comparing Command and Control Regulations with Price Incentives in India," NBER Working Papers 21763, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Suyu Huang & Hanlian Lin & Yongjunbei Zhou & Haonan Ji & Naiping Zhu, 2022. "The Influence of the Policy of Replacing Environmental Protection Fees with Taxes on Enterprise Green Innovation—Evidence from China’s Heavily Polluting Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-23, June.
    3. Parvez Alam Khan & Satirenjit Kaur Johl & Shakeb Akhtar, 2021. "Firm Sustainable Development Goals and Firm Financial Performance through the Lens of Green Innovation Practices and Reporting: A Proactive Approach," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-23, December.
    4. Mara Faccio, 2006. "Politically Connected Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 369-386, March.
    5. Ann E. Harrison & Ben Hyman & Leslie A. Martin & Shanthi Nataraj, 2015. "When do Firms Go Green? Comparing Price Incentives with Command and Control Regulations in India," Working Papers WR-1133, RAND Corporation.
    6. Jacob Guinot & Zina Barghouti & Ricardo Chiva, 2022. "Understanding Green Innovation: A Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, May.
    7. González, Maximiliano & Guzmán, Alexander & Pombo, Carlos & Trujillo, María-Andrea, 2013. "Family firms and debt: Risk aversion versus risk of losing control," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(11), pages 2308-2320.
    8. Ann Harrison & Benjamin Hyman & Leslie Martin & Shanthi Nataraj, 2015. "When do Firms Go Green? Comparing Price Incentives with Command and Control Regulations in India," NBER Working Papers 21763, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Rosa Maria Dangelico & Alberto Nastasi & Simone Pisa, 2019. "A comparison of family and nonfamily small firms in their approach to green innovation: A study of Italian companies in the agri‐food industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(7), pages 1434-1448, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Limin Geng & Xueyuan Lu & Can Zhang, 2023. "The Theoretical Lineage and Evolutionary Logic of Research on the Environmental Behavior of Family Firms: A Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-23, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hao, Miao & Lyv, Kangjuan & Li, Shiyuan & Hu, Wuyang, 2021. "How does environmental regulation affect firm innovation? Evidence based on corporate life cycle," MPRA Paper 110971, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Brucal, Arlan & Javorcik, Beata & Love, Inessa, 2019. "Good for the environment, good for business: Foreign acquisitions and energy intensity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    3. Goetz, Martin, 2019. "Financing conditions and toxic emissions," SAFE Working Paper Series 254, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    4. Götz, Martin, 2018. "Financial constraints and corporate environmental responsibility," SAFE Working Paper Series 241, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    5. Puja Singhal, 2018. "Environmental Regulations: Lessons from the Command-and-Control Approach," DIW Roundup: Politik im Fokus 124, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    6. Li, Shiyuan, 2021. "Corporate performance under air pollution control: Evidence from “Atmosphere Ten Articles” Policy," MPRA Paper 110974, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Zhengge Tu & Tao Zhou & Ning Zhang, 2019. "Does China’s Pollution Levy Standards Reform Promote Green Growth?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-18, November.
    8. Li, Hai-ling & Zhu, Xue-hong & Chen, Jin-yu & Jiang, Fei-tao, 2019. "Environmental regulations, environmental governance efficiency and the green transformation of China's iron and steel enterprises," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Puja Singhal, 2018. "Are Emission Performance Standards Effective in Pollution Control? Evidence from the EU's Large Combustion Plant Directive," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1773, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    10. Inessa Love & Beata Javorcik & Arlan Brucal, 2017. "Pollution Haven or Halo? Evidence from Foreign Acquisitions in Indonesia," 2017 Meeting Papers 306, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    11. Arlan Brucal, Inessa Love, Beata Javorcik, 2018. "Energy savings through foreign acquisitions? Evidence from Indonesian manufacturing plants," GRI Working Papers 289, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    12. Yueming Qiu & Shuai Yin & Yi David Wang, 2016. "Peer Effects and Voluntary Green Building Certification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Limin Geng & Xueyuan Lu & Can Zhang, 2023. "The Theoretical Lineage and Evolutionary Logic of Research on the Environmental Behavior of Family Firms: A Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-23, March.
    14. Nian, Yongwei, 2023. "Incentives, penalties, and rural air pollution: Evidence from satellite data," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    15. Swanpitak, Tanapond & Pan, Xiaofei & Suardi, Sandy, 2020. "The value of family control during political uncertainty: Evidence from Thailand's constitutional change in 201411We are grateful for helpful comments and suggestions provided by Shu-Ching Chou, Wooch," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    16. Marcos Carchano & Jean-Marie Cardebat & Angela Gonzalez & Inmaculada Carrasco, 2024. "Moving toward environmental sustainability through green entrepreneurship: assessing the moderating role of managerial environmental commitment," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 2209-2240, September.
    17. Zhang, Bingbing & Yu, Lan & Sun, Chuanwang, 2022. "How does urban environmental legislation guide the green transition of enterprises? Based on the perspective of enterprises' green total factor productivity," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    18. Zheng Zhiyong & Xu Buyun & Xu Yongbin, 2024. "Family business financialization and green innovation in China from 2008 to 2023," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 2453-2479, December.
    19. Haikun Zhu, 2018. "Social Stability and Resource Allocation within Business Groups," Working Papers Series 79, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    20. Bliss, Mark A. & Gul, Ferdinand A., 2012. "Political connection and leverage: Some Malaysian evidence," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2344-2350.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13258-:d:943034. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.